[MarkJerling]

You're entitled to be paid for allowing someone to view your copyrighted images. I'd send the airline a bill. Follow up in a collection action in the local lower level court. You'll get a judgment because the airline won't bother to show up. I got a judgment against KLM Royal Dutch Airlines once, in a similar fashion. They were so surprised when I domesticated the judgment in the superior court of record and got a writ of fieri facias to have the county sheriff seize one of their airplanes on the tarmac of Reagan National Airport. They paid up right quick.

That's pretty funny. How much did they owe you?

[Lowell Goudge]

I remember a discussion a long time ago regarding privacy laws.

I will take an analogous situation. You are photographing a celebrity in a restaurant. If you are inside the restaurant it is a violation of the celebrity’s privacy because he and you are on private property. if you are outside and you can see the celebrity easily, without going outside normal activities, and on public property the celebrity is fair game. The distinction is he is clearly visible from a public space.

An airplane is private property, not public. Any photo taken inside is subject to privacy laws.

In almost all work places today, there are no photo rules, where if someone wants a photo, it has to be provided by the workplace owner / tenant and insure that no one in the photo is recognizable. Why should an airplane be different

The only thing I am not sure about, is the right to detain. That is more of the issue,

[luftfluss]

I remember a discussion a long time ago regarding privacy laws.

I will take an analogous situation. You are photographing a celebrity in a restaurant. If you are inside the restaurant it is a violation of the celebrity’s privacy because he and you are on private property. if you are outside and you can see the celebrity easily, without going outside normal activities, and on public property the celebrity is fair game. The distinction is he is clearly visible from a public space.

An airplane is private property, not public. Any photo taken inside is subject to privacy laws.

In almost all work places today, there are no photo rules, where if someone wants a photo, it has to be provided by the workplace owner / tenant and insure that no one in the photo is recognizable. Why should an airplane be different

The only thing I am not sure about, is the right to detain. That is more of the issue,

I don't know about Canada, but in the USA there is "expectation of privacy". At a private place where the general public can gather - like a mall, for example - there is no expectation of privacy. But if you are in a mall's bathroom, there you do have an expectation of privacy.

[MarkJerling]

I just found this interesting article about this sort of issue: Are you allowed to take pictures on planes? Yes and no. - The Washington Post

[Lowell Goudge]

I don't know about Canada, but in the USA there is "expectation of privacy". At a private place where the general public can gather - like a mall, for example - there is no expectation of privacy. But if you are in a mall's bathroom, there you do have an expectation of privacy.

The mall owner has the right to ban all photography, this was much more enforced after 9/11 but has always been there. I have had several security people in US malls tell me no photography, even if it was only to take shots of architectural interest

Someone needs to pull up all the old posts regarding photographers rights. We had tons of posts.

[luftfluss]

The mall owner has the right to ban all photography, this was much more enforced after 9/11 but has always been there. I have had several security people in US malls tell me no photography, even if it was only to take shots of architectural interest

Someone needs to pull up all the old posts regarding photographers rights. We had tons of posts.

Sure, but that is the mall owner. It is not an "expectation of privacy" issue.

If the airline in question from the OP did not have an existing ban on in-cabin photography, they probably can't just make one up on the spot and seize the passenger's phone, unless there is some sort of "we reserve the right to inspect all belongings" provision.

[luftfluss]

I just found this interesting article about this sort of issue: Are you allowed to take pictures on planes? Yes and no. - The Washington Post

Well, here we go:

United’s {United Airplines} photography policy, which is typical for a U.S. airline, notes that taking pictures or video on its aircraft is permitted “only for capturing personal events.” It goes on to note that “photography or recording of other customers or airline personnel without their express prior consent is strictly prohibited.

[Just1MoreDave]

After you leave the plane you aren’t on their property.

That's an interesting legal point. On the plane, flight attendants have broad authority and passengers don't. But that has to end somewhere - is it the jetbridge or the terminal? Because they asked/forced this guy back on the plane, I think they wanted the broad authority of the plane. The airport is probably full of changing jurisdictions and authorities.

If I'm getting off an Airbus 321 from Seattle to Charlotte, a 5 hour flight, I am certainly not thinking about legal boundaries of authority or photography. I'm thinking about putting that aluminum tube behind me as fast as I can walk, and looking for a restroom sign.

[UncleVanya]

If I'm getting off an Airbus 321 from Seattle to Charlotte, a 5 hour flight, I am certainly not thinking about legal boundaries of authority or photography. I'm thinking about putting that aluminum tube behind me as fast as I can walk, and looking for a restroom sign.

On this there's likely NO debate. LOL. I too am going to want to get off, grab a moment in the restroom and then find somewhere to relax and maybe grab a bite.

Good perspectives in this thread so far. Thank you all for not turning this into a political witch hunt.

[JohnMc]

The gate area, perhaps even the concourse is under control of the airline and the employees do have some discretion. If you don't like the FA's "ignorance of law and/or culture" you are 100% free to challenge it. There are quite practical reasons for segregating a passenger and preventing them from entering the concourse area. Having a camera doesn't itself confer any additional right, privilege or freedom to the holder(s). We don't know what the FA saw that caused concern, but it's often quite a different scene on the other side of the viewfinder. Walk a residential street with a long lens mounted, scoping the trees in front of houses for squirrels or owls (from the public road or sidewalk) and see what kind of responses are elicited. Same experiment can be tried out around a number of military installations that are adjacent to or bisected by public roads.

[SportsDudeJeff]

Replace American Airlines with Martha Stewart, and I know the feeling.
20 years ago I was a reporter with Furniture Today newspaper. I was invited to a press conference where she announced a licensed collection with Bernhardt Furniture.
I wasn’t that good yet with photography, so my boss sent a freelancer with me.
After the announcement, a team of Martha’s PR people surrounded us and wouldn’t let us leave with the photos.
I’m above average on size and former military. David was about 6’5 and muscular (former male model - eye roll).
I told them that if they tried to take our camera, there’d be hell to pay.
I turned to look at David, and the giant teddy bear was hitting the delete button as fast as he could go. LOL

[UncleVanya]

Replace American Airlines with Martha Stewart, and I know the feeling.
20 years ago I was a reporter with Furniture Today newspaper. I was invited to a press conference where she announced a licensed collection with Bernhardt Furniture.
I wasn’t that good yet with photography, so my boss sent a freelancer with me.
After the announcement, a team of Martha’s PR people surrounded us and wouldn’t let us leave with the photos.
I’m above average on size and former military. David was about 6’5 and muscular (former male model - eye roll).
I told them that if they tried to take our camera, there’d be hell to pay.
I turned to look at David, and the giant teddy bear was hitting the delete button as fast as he could go. LOL

That is comedy gold...

[Sandy Hancock]

I always fly with my camera as carry-on. Any shots I have taken during a flight have been out the window, or specifically of my wife.

This was on our first long haul flight together, and Joan's enjoyment of the pointy end of the plane was obvious:



And on another trip, flying to Seattle from Dubai over Russia, Finland, Greenland and Baffin Island could not be ignored.



But there's no way I would take general shots around the passenger area, and certainly not of other passengers. I could well imagine the cabin crew viewing that in a dim light.

[MarkJerling]

Tha pointy end! You rich bugger! LOL

[yucatanPentax]

That's an interesting legal point. On the plane, flight attendants have broad authority and passengers don't. But that has to end somewhere - is it the jetbridge or the terminal? Because they asked/forced this guy back on the plane, I think they wanted the broad authority of the plane. The airport is probably full of changing jurisdictions and authorities.

If I'm getting off an Airbus 321 from Seattle to Charlotte, a 5 hour flight, I am certainly not thinking about legal boundaries of authority or photography. I'm thinking about putting that aluminum tube behind me as fast as I can walk, and looking for a restroom sign.

My feeling (claiming no authority on this matter) is that the airline's control extends to the gate area. Gates are typically rented and even constructed (the finish-out) by the airlines. As such, they likely have some controlling rights there.

But step from the gate area carpet onto the center concourse lanes, and you're likely in public areas (or public access, which is roughly the same thing for photography). As we've seen, even TSA doesn't limit photography in their areas, so it's hard to see that the concourse would be more 'private' than security screening areas.

I'm like you, when the plane lands, I just want off, and out of there. I remember the days of cheerful people on planes, even actual plates and stainless tableware, rather than stale bagels wrapped in plastic and plastic knives that won't cut them. Compared to those days, there's simply nothing much pleasant about flying today. Combine that with raging passengers and FAs who are pretty much tired of their passengers (often for good reason), well, time to get away from the plane as quickly as possible!